DAFTAR PUSTAKA
1.
World Health Organization. WHO global estimates on prevalence of hearing loss. World Health Organization; 2012.
2.
American Speech-Languge-Hearing Association. Type, degree, and configuration of hearing loss. Rockville: American Speech-LanguageHearing Association; 2015.
3.
Soetirto I, Hendarmin H, Bashiruddin J. Gangguan pendengaran (tuli). In: Soepardi EA, Iskandar N, Bashiruddin J, Restuti RD, editors. Buku ajar ilmu kesehatan telinga hidung tenggorokan kepala dan leher. 7th ed. Jakarta: Badan Penerbit Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia; 2014. p. 273.
4.
Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Hasil survei kesehatan indera penglihatan dan pendengaran 1993-1996. Jakarta: Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia; 1998. p. 73.
5.
Campbell TF, Dollaghan C, Rockette HE, Paradise JL, Feldman HM, Shriberg LD, et al. Risk factors for speech delay of unknown origin in 3-yearold children. Child Dev. 2003; 74(2):346–57.
6.
American Speech-Languge-Hearing Association. Effect of hearing loss on development. American Speech-Languge-Hearing Association. Rockville: American Speech-Languge-Hearing Association; 2015.
7.
Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Executive summary of joint committe on infant hearing year 2007 position statement: Principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Joint Committee on Infant Hearing; 2007.
8.
Bansal M. Sensorineural hearing loss. In: Diseases of ear, nose, and throat. 1st ed. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd; 2013. p. 162.
9.
Udji B, Rianto D, Raditya AE, Hernaldo S. The role of cytomegalovirus in children sensorineural hearing loss. 2014; 50:95.
62
63
10.
Dewi YA. Karakteristik gangguan pendengaran sensorineural bilateral kongenital pada anak yang dideteksi dengan pemeriksaan BERA [skripsi]. Bandung: Universitas Padjajaran; 2005.
11.
Rahman A, Muyassaroh. Hubungan antara riwayat prenatal dam perinatal dengan kejadian SNHL berat-sangat berat pada anak di RSUP Dokter Kariadi Semarang [skripsi]. Semarang: Universitas Diponegoro; 2010.
12.
Rahman S, Hanifatryevi. Asfiksia perinatal sebagai faktor resiko gangguan pendengaran pada anak [skripsi]. Padang: Universitas Andalas; 2015.
13.
Aji DS, Widuri A. Hearing disorders on newborn with premature risk factors at Hospital of PKU Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta [skripsi]. Yogyakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta; 2014.
14.
Muyassaroh, Kosim MS, Suprihati. Faktor risiko kejadian kurang pendengaran tipe sensorik pada bayi baru lahir. Media Med Indones. 2011; 45(3):158–62.
15.
Martina AA, Sutomo R, Arguni E. Association between low birth weight and speech delay related sensorineural hearing loss: A Study in RSUP dr Sardjito Yogyakarta from 2009-2013 [skripsi]. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada; 2015.
16.
Early Hearing Loss Detection Diagnosis and Intervention (EHDDI) Program. Risk factors for late onset hearing loss : Extended stay in NICU. Washington DC: Washington State Department of Health; 2013.
17.
Weichbold V, Nekahm-Heis D, Welzl-Mueller K. Universal newborn hearing screening and postnatal hearing loss. Am Acad Pediatr. 2006; 117(4):631–6.
18.
Guiding Principles for Infant Hearing Screening in The South East Asia Region [Internet]. Sound Hearing 2030; 2015 [cited 2015 Dec 30]. Available from:
http://www.soundhearing2030.org/Guiding-Principles-for-Infant-
Hearing-Screening.doc 19.
Winston R, Ditty KM. Newborn hearing screening. In: A resource guide for early Hearing detection and intervention. Utah: National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management Utah State University; 2010.
64
20.
Esteves MCBN, Dell’ Aringa AHB, Arruda GV, Dell’ Aringa AR, Nardi JC. Brainstem evoked response audiometry in normal hearing subjects. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2009; 75(3):420–5.
21.
Herwindo B, Rianto BUD, Prasetyo A. Faktor risiko gangguan pendengaran sensorineural pada anak [skripsi]. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada; 2015.
22.
World Health Organization. Prevention of blindness and deafness (PBD) program: Grades of hearing impairment. World Health Organization; 2013.
23.
Mahoney N. Language and linguistics: Speech is physical [Internet]. The National Science Foundation. [cited 2016 Jan 25]. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/linguistics/speech.jsp
24.
Shah RK, Lotke M, Windle ML, McClay J, Isaacson GC, Brown O. Hearing impairment. Medscape Reference; 2011.
25.
Maqbool M. Examination of the ear. In: Textbook of ear, nose, and throat diseases. 11th ed. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd; 2007. p. 132
26.
Thirunavukarasu
R, Balasubramaniam
GK,
Kalyanasundaram
RB,
Narendran G, Sridhar S. A study of brainstem evoked response audiometry in high-risk infants and children under 10 years of age. Indian J Otol 2015; 21:134-7 27.
Bhattacharyya N, Talavera F, Gianoli GJ, Meyers AD, Megerian CA. Audiometry brainstem response audiometry. Medscape References. [Internet]. 2015 [updated 2015 March 5; cited 2016 June 23]. Available from: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/836277-overview
28.
Agarwal A, Djelantik B, Garg S, Khurana D. About sound hearing 2030. In: First world congress on ear and hearing care under the aegis of society for sound hearing. New Delhi: Sound Hearing 2030; 2015. p. 22.
29.
Mikulec AA. Congenital hearing loss (sensorineural and conductive). In: Mitchell RB, Pereira KD, editors. Pediatric otolaryngology for the clinician. 1st ed. New York: Humana Press; 2009. p. 250.
30.
Disability fact Sheet: Speech and language impairments. Washington DC:
65
National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities; 2004. 31.
McLaughlin MR. Speech and language delay in children. Am Fam Physician. 2011; 83(10):1183–8.
32.
Hagan JF, Shaw JS, Duncan PM, editors. Bright futures: Guidelines for health supervision of infants, children, and adolescents. 3rd ed. Elk Grove Village, IL: The American Academy of Pediatrics; 2008. p. 55.
33.
Suwento R, Zizlavsky S, Hendarmin H. Gangguan pendengaran pada bayi dan anak. In: Soepardi EA, Iskandar N, Bashiruddin J, Restuti RD, editors. Buku ajar ilmu kesehatan telinga hidung tenggorokan kepala dan leher. 7th ed. Jakarta: Badan Penerbit Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia; 2014. p. 273.
34.
Leung AKC, Kao CP. Evaluation and management of the child with speech delay. Am Fam Physician. 1999 ;59(11):3–9.
35.
Cheeran MC, Lokensgard JR, Schleiss MR. Neuropathogenesis of congenital cytomegalovirus infection : Disease mechanisms and prospects for intervention. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2009; 22(1):99–126.
36.
Cohen BE, Durstenfeld A, Roehm PC. Viral causes of hearing loss : A review for hearing health professionals. 2014; 18:1–17.
37.
Schraff SA, Schleiss MR, Brown DK, Meinzen-derr J, Choi KY, Greinwald JH, et al. Macrophage inflammatory proteins in cytomegalovirus-related inner ear injury. Am Otolaryngol Neck Surg. 2007; 137:612–8.
38.
Goderis J, De Leenheer E, Smets K, Van Hoecke H, Keymeulen A, Dhooge I. Hearing loss and congenital CMV infection: a systematic review. Pediatrics. 2014; 134(5):972–82.
39.
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention of measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome, and mumps (Summary recommendations of the advisory committee on immunization practices (ACIP)). Center for Disease Control and Prevention: United State Department of Health and Human Services; 2013.
40.
Marlow E, Hunt L, Marlow N. Sensorineural hearing loss and prematurity. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2000; 82:141–4.
66
41.
Gowen CW. Kedokteran fetal dan neonatal. In: Rundjan L, Roeslani R, editors. Nelson: Ilmu kesehatan anak esensial. 6th ed. Singapore: Elsevier Ltd; 2014. p. 878.
42.
Porter ML, Dennis BL. Hyperbilirubinemia in the term newborn. Am Fam Physician. 2002; 24(4):599–606.
43.
Bailey BJ, Johnson JT, Newlands SD. Sensorineural hearing loss. In: Hurley R, LaPlante M, Connors M, editors. Head and neck surgery Otolaryngology. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006. p. 1299–301.
44.
Mishra S, Agarwal R, Deorari AK, Paul VK. Jaundice in the newborns. Indian J Pediactrics. 2008; 75:157–63.
45.
Stich-Hennen J, Bargen GA. Risk monitoring for late onset hearing loss. In: A resource guide for early hearing detection and intervention. Utah: National Center for Hearing Assessment and Management Utah State University; 2010. p. 193–205.
46.
Antonucci R, Porcella A, Pilloni MD. Perinatal asphyxia in the term newborn. J Pediatr Neonatal Individ Med. 2014; 3(2):1–14.
47.
Setyarini TK. Pengaruh asfiksia neonatal terhadap terjadinya gangguan pendengaran sensorineural. Universitas Diponegoro; 2011.
48.
Eras Z, Konukseven O, Aksoy HT, Canpolat FE, Genç A, Sakrucu ED, et al. Postnatal risk factors associated with hearing loss among high-risk preterm infants: tertiary center results from Turkey. Eur Arch Oto-RhinoLaryngology. 2014 Jul; 271(6):1485–90.
49.
Hain TC. Post-traumatic hearing loss [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2016 Jan 6]. Available
from:
http://www.dizziness-and-
balance.com/disorders/post/posttrau hearing.html 50.
Moeller MP, Eiten L, White K, Shisler L. Strategies for educating physicians about newborn hearing screening. J Acad Rehabil Audiol. 2006; 39:1–21.
51.
Dahlan MS. Menggunakan rumus besar sampel secara benar. In: Susila A, editor. Besar sampel dan cara pengambilan sampel dalam penelitian kedokteran dan kesehatan. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Salemba Medica; 2013. p. 35–
67
80. 52.
Audiology Information Series. Ototoxic medications. Rockville: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; 2015.
53.
World Health Organization. World health assembly global nutrition targets 2025: Low birth weight policy brief. World Health Organization; 2014.
54.
Impey L, Child T. The history and examination in Obstetry. In: Obstetry and gynaecology. 4th ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2012. p. 137–45.
55.
Engdahl B, Eskild A. Birthweight and the risk of childhood sensorineural hearing loss. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2007; 21(6):495-500.
56.
Kramer MS. The epidemiology of adverse pregnancy outcomes: an overview. Journal of Nutrition 2003; 133 (5 Suppl. 2):1592–96.
57.
Yamamoto AY, Mussi-Pinhata MM, Isaac M de L, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection as a cause of sensorineural hearing loss in a highly immune population. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2011; 30(12):1043-1046.
58.
Schacht J, Talaska AE, Rybak LP. Cisplatin and Aminoglycoside Antibiotics: Hearing Loss and Its Prevention. Anat Rec. 2013;295(11):18371850.
59.
Mohammad DNC, Sutomo R, Arguni E.. Association between prematurity and sensorineural hearing loss among children with speech delay: a study in rsup dr sardjito from 2009 to 2013 [sikripsi]. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada; 2015.
60.
Yuliana. The analysis of risk factors of hearing impairment and deafness in newborn at Wahidin Sudirohusodo Hospital Makassar [skripsi]. Makassar: Universitas Hasanuddin; 2014.
61.
Fithia N, Sutomo R, Arguni E. Association between birth asphyxia and speech delayed related to sensorineural hearing loss in children: A study in RSUP Dr Sardjito Yogyakarta from 2009 to 2013 [skripsi]. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada; 2015.
62.
Schmutzhard J, Glueckert R, Sergi C, Schwentner I, Abraham I, Schrott-
68
Fischer A. Does perinatal asphyxia induce apoptosis in the inner ear? Hear Res. 2009;250(1-2):1-9. 63.
Menkes JH, Sarnat HB, Maria BL. Perinatal Asphyxia and Trauma. In: Child Neurology. 7th ed. Philadelphia, USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006:367-432.
64.
Rasyidah, Sutomo R, Arguni E. Association between neonatal jaundice and sensorineural hearing loss among children with speech delay: A study RSUP Dr Sardjito from 2009-2013. 2015.
65.
Mishra S, Agarwal R, Deorari AK, Paul VK. Jaundice in Newborns. Indian J Pediactrics. 2008;75(2):157-163.
66.
Wickremasinghe AC, Risley RJ, Kuzniewicz MW, et al. Risk of sensorineural hearing loss and bilirubin exchange transfusion thresholds. Pediatrics. 2015;136(3):505-512.
67.
Bailey BJ, Johnson JT, Newlands SD. Sensorineural Hearing Loss. In: Hurley R, LaPlante M, Connors M, eds. Head and Neck Surgery Otolaryngology. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006:1299-1301.
68.
Vartiainen E, Karjalainen S, Karja J. Auditory disorders following head injury in children. Acta Otolaryngol. 2010;99(5-6):529-536.
69
Lampiran 1. Etichal Clearane
70
Lampiran 2. Surat Ijin Penelitian
71
Lampiran 3. Contoh Informed Consent
72
73
74
75
Lampiran 4. Spreadsheet Data Subjek Penelitian
Nomor CM
Diagnosis
Jenis Kelamin
1. SNHL
1. Laki-laki
Usia
Cara
Infeksi
Obat
Persalinan
Prenatal
Ototoksik 1. Ya
2. Normal 2. Perempuan (bulan) 1. Pervaginam 1. Ya 2. SC
1. Ya
BBLR
Lahir
Prematur Neonatal
2. Tidak 1. Ya
2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Asfiksia
2. Tidak
1. Ya
Ikterus
Infeksi
Neonatal
Postnatal Mekanis
Kepala
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
2. Tidak
2. Tidak
2. Tidak 2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Ventilator Trauma
C572578
1
2
61
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C463119
1
1
51
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C430723
1
1
31
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
C575642
1
1
21
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C575838
1
1
59
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
C576584
1
2
64
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
C576993
1
2
33
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
C576736
1
2
10
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
C565226
1
1
64
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
C577868
1
1
40
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
C572683
1
1
38
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
C579262
1
1
35
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C578797
1
1
47
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C579262
1
1
19
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
76
Nomor CM
Diagnosis
Jenis Kelamin
1. SNHL
1. Laki-laki
Usia
Cara
Infeksi
Obat
Persalinan
Prenatal
Ototoksik 1. Ya
2. Normal 2. Perempuan (bulan) 1. Pervaginam 1. Ya 2. SC
1. Ya
BBLR
Lahir
Prematur Neonatal
2. Tidak 1. Ya
2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Asfiksia
2. Tidak
1. Ya
Ikterus
Infeksi
Neonatal
Postnatal Mekanis
Kepala
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
2. Tidak
2. Tidak
2. Tidak 2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Ventilator Trauma
C579016
1
2
49
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
C579930
1
1
27
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
C581207
1
2
45
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
C583574
1
1
27
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C584479
1
1
29
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
C583071
1
2
26
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
C585114
1
2
42
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C588437
1
1
26
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C585633
1
1
45
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
C587148
1
2
37
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
C587162
1
2
24
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
C586521
1
1
27
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
C579006
1
2
48
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C577964
1
2
51
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C564139
1
2
23
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C572934
1
1
22
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
77
Nomor CM
Diagnosis
Jenis Kelamin
1. SNHL
1. Laki-laki
Usia
Cara
Infeksi
Obat
Persalinan
Prenatal
Ototoksik 1. Ya
2. Normal 2. Perempuan (bulan) 1. Pervaginam 1. Ya 2. SC
1. Ya
BBLR
Lahir
Prematur Neonatal
2. Tidak 1. Ya
2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Asfiksia
2. Tidak
1. Ya
Ikterus
Infeksi
Neonatal
Postnatal Mekanis
Kepala
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
2. Tidak
2. Tidak
2. Tidak 2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Ventilator Trauma
C568343
1
1
59
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C519062
2
1
28
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C459433
2
1
26
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C573891
2
1
45
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
C475044
2
1
22
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C572699
2
1
26
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
C576072
2
2
32
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
C511090
2
2
38
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C574305
2
1
30
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
C567769
2
1
24
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
C561307
2
2
15
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
C578811
2
2
34
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C578142
2
1
9
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
C582608
2
1
27
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C576537
2
2
25
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C581935
2
2
24
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
78
Nomor CM
Diagnosis
Jenis Kelamin
1. SNHL
1. Laki-laki
Usia
Cara
Infeksi
Obat
Persalinan
Prenatal
Ototoksik 1. Ya
2. Normal 2. Perempuan (bulan) 1. Pervaginam 1. Ya 2. SC
1. Ya
BBLR
Lahir
Prematur Neonatal
2. Tidak 1. Ya
2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Asfiksia
2. Tidak
1. Ya
Ikterus
Infeksi
Neonatal
Postnatal Mekanis
Kepala
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
1. Ya
2. Tidak
2. Tidak
2. Tidak 2. Tidak 2. Tidak
Ventilator Trauma
C583693
2
1
48
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
C570754
2
2
58
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
C569459
2
1
20
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
C584263
2
1
32
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
C585231
2
1
48
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C586323
2
2
26
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C586324
2
2
21
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C577729
2
2
39
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
C578113
2
2
42
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
C562237
2
1
12
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C587077
2
1
77
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
C583465
2
1
10
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
C587967
2
1
48
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
C377502
2
2
48
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
C574247
2
2
35
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
C567258
2
2
22
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
79
Lampiran 5. Hasil Analisis SPSS 1. Analisis Subjek Penelitian 1.1. Karakteristik penderita speech delay 1.1.1. Jenis kelamin Jenis kelamin * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL Jenis kelamin
Laki-laki
Count
17
35
17,5
17,5
35,0
% within Jenis kelamin
51,4%
48,6%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
58,1%
54,8%
56,5%
% of Total
29,0%
27,4%
56,5%
13
14
27
13,5
13,5
27,0
% within Jenis kelamin
48,1%
51,9%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
41,9%
45,2%
43,5%
% of Total
21,0%
22,6%
43,5%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Count Expected Count
Total
Total
18
Expected Count
Perempuan
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Jenis kelamin % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity
Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
,066a
1
,798
,000
1
1,000
,066
1
,798
Fisher's Exact Test Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
1,000 ,065
1
,799
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 13,50.
,500
80
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Jenis kelamin (Laki-laki / Perempuan) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL
Upper
1,140
,418
3,114
1,068
,643
1,773
,937
,569
1,542
For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
1.1.2
Lower
62
Usia Tests of Normality Kolmogorov-Smirnova
Diagnosis
Statistic Usia
df
Shapiro-Wilk
Sig.
Statistic
Sig.
SNHL
,130
31
,198
,957
31
,250
Tidak SNHL
,122
31
,200*
,940
31
,080
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance. a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Ranks Diagnosis Usia
df
N
Mean Rank
Sum of Ranks
SNHL
31
35,45
1099,00
Tidak SNHL
31
27,55
854,00
Total
62
Test Statisticsa Usia Mann-Whitney U
358,000
Wilcoxon W
854,000
Z
-1,726
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) a. Grouping Variable: Diagnosis
,084
81
1.2 Karakteristik ibu 1.2.1
Pendidikan terakhir ibu Pendidikan ibu * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL
Pendidikan ibu
S1/sederajat
Count
10
16
8,0
8,0
16,0
% within Pendidikan ibu
37,5%
62,5%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
19,4%
32,3%
25,8%
9,7%
16,1%
25,8%
0
4
4
2,0
2,0
4,0
% within Pendidikan ibu
0,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
0,0%
12,9%
6,5%
% of Total
0,0%
6,5%
6,5%
15
9
24
12,0
12,0
24,0
% within Pendidikan ibu
62,5%
37,5%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
48,4%
29,0%
38,7%
% of Total
24,2%
14,5%
38,7%
Count
10
6
16
Expected Count
8,0
8,0
16,0
% within Pendidikan ibu
62,5%
37,5%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
32,3%
19,4%
25,8%
% of Total
16,1%
9,7%
25,8%
0
2
2
1,0
1,0
2,0
% within Pendidikan ibu
0,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
0,0%
6,5%
3,2%
% of Total
0,0%
3,2%
3,2%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% of Total Count Expected Count
SMA/sederajat
Count Expected Count
SMP/sederajat
SD/sederajat
Count Expected Count
Total
Total
6
Expected Count
D3/sederajat
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Pendidikan ibu % within Diagnosis % of Total
82
Test Statisticsa Pendidikan ibu Most Extreme Differences
Absolute
,258
Positive
,065
Negative
-,258
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1,016
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,253
a. Grouping Variable: Diagnosis
1.2.1
Pekerjaan ibu
Pekerjaan ibu * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL Pekerjaan ibu
PNS
Count
7
8
4,0
4,0
8,0
12,5%
87,5%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
3,2%
22,6%
12,9%
% of Total
1,6%
11,3%
12,9%
3
8
11
5,5
5,5
11,0
27,3%
72,7%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
9,7%
25,8%
17,7%
% of Total
4,8%
12,9%
17,7%
3
3
6
3,0
3,0
6,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
9,7%
9,7%
9,7%
% of Total
4,8%
4,8%
9,7%
2
0
2
1,0
1,0
2,0
100,0%
0,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
6,5%
0,0%
3,2%
% of Total
3,2%
0,0%
3,2%
% within Pekerjaan ibu
Count Expected Count % within Pekerjaan ibu
Wiraswasta
Count Expected Count % within Pekerjaan ibu
Buruh
Total
1
Expected Count
Karyawan swasta
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Pekerjaan ibu
83
Ibu rumah tangga
Count
20
13
33
16,5
16,5
33,0
% within Pekerjaan ibu
60,6%
39,4%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
64,5%
41,9%
53,2%
% of Total
32,3%
21,0%
53,2%
2
0
2
1,0
1,0
2,0
100,0%
0,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
6,5%
0,0%
3,2%
% of Total
3,2%
0,0%
3,2%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Expected Count
Lain-lain
Count Expected Count % within Pekerjaan ibu
Total
Count Expected Count % within Pekerjaan ibu % within Diagnosis % of Total Test Statisticsa Pekerjaan ibu
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute
,355
Positive
,000
Negative
-,355
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
1,397
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)
,040
a. Grouping Variable: Diagnosis
1.2.2
Cara persalinan
Cara persalinan * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL Cara persalinan
Normal
Count
Tidak SNHL
Total
29
18
47
23,5
23,5
47,0
% within Cara persalinan
61,7%
38,3%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
93,5%
58,1%
75,8%
% of Total
46,8%
29,0%
75,8%
Expected Count
84
Tidak normal
Count
2
13
15
7,5
7,5
15,0
13,3%
86,7%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
6,5%
41,9%
24,2%
% of Total
3,2%
21,0%
24,2%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Expected Count % within Cara persalinan
Total
Count Expected Count % within Cara persalinan % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity
Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
10,641a
1
,001
8,794
1
,003
11,613
1
,001
Fisher's Exact Test
,002
Linear-by-Linear Association
10,470
N of Valid Cases
1
,001
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 7,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value
Lower
Upper
Odds Ratio for Cara persalinan (Normal / Tidak
10,472
2,113
51,903
4,628
1,249
17,146
,442
,292
,668
normal) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
62
,001
85
2. Analisis Inferensial 2.1. Faktor prenatal 2.1.1. Infeksi prenatal Infeksi prenatal * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL Infeksi prenatal
Ya
Count
1
2
1,0
1,0
2,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
3,2%
3,2%
3,2%
% of Total
1,6%
1,6%
3,2%
30
30
60
30,0
30,0
60,0
% within Infeksi prenatal
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
96,8%
96,8%
96,8%
% of Total
48,4%
48,4%
96,8%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Infeksi prenatal
Count Expected Count
Total
Total
1
Expected Count
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Infeksi prenatal % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity
Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
,000a
1
1,000
,000
1
1,000
,000
1
1,000
Fisher's Exact Test Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
1,000 ,000
1
1,000
62
a. 2 cells (50,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1,00. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
,754
86
Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Infeksi prenatal (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.1.2
Lower
Upper
1,000
,060
16,737
1,000
,244
4,091
1,000
,244
4,091
62
Penggunaan obat ototoksik Penggunaan obat ototoksik * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL
Penggunaan obat ototoksik
Ya
0
1
1
Expected Count
,5
,5
1,0
0,0%
100,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
0,0%
3,2%
1,6%
% of Total
0,0%
1,6%
1,6%
31
30
61
30,5
30,5
61,0
50,8%
49,2%
100,0%
100,0%
96,8%
98,4%
50,0%
48,4%
98,4%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
ototoksik
Count Expected Count % within Penggunaan obat ototoksik % within Diagnosis % of Total
Total
Total
Count
% within Penggunaan obat
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Penggunaan obat ototoksik % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests
87
Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity Correctionb Likelihood Ratio
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
df
1,016a
1
,313
,000
1
1,000
1,403
1
,236
Fisher's Exact Test
1,000
Linear-by-Linear Association
1,000
N of Valid Cases
1
,317
62
a. 2 cells (50,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is ,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value For cohort Diagnosis =
2,033
Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.2
Lower
Upper
1,576
2,624
62
Faktor perinatal
2.2.2
BBLR
BBLR * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL BBLR
Ya
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Total
Count
10
1
11
Expected Count
5,5
5,5
11,0
% within BBLR
90,9%
9,1%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
32,3%
3,2%
17,7%
% of Total
16,1%
1,6%
17,7%
21
30
51
25,5
25,5
51,0
% within BBLR
41,2%
58,8%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
67,7%
96,8%
82,3%
% of Total
33,9%
48,4%
82,3%
Count Expected Count
,500
88
Total
Count Expected Count % within BBLR % within Diagnosis % of Total
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity Correctionb Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
8,952a
1
,003
7,073
1
,008
10,144
1
,001
Fisher's Exact Test
,006
Linear-by-Linear Association
8,807
N of Valid Cases
1
,003
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for BBLR (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
Lower
Upper
14,286
1,698
120,203
2,208
1,514
3,220
,155
,024
1,016
62
,003
89
2.2.2
Prematuritas Prematuritas * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL
Prematuritas
Ya
Count
3
11
5,5
5,5
11,0
% within Prematuritas
72,7%
27,3%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
25,8%
9,7%
17,7%
% of Total
12,9%
4,8%
17,7%
23
28
51
25,5
25,5
51,0
% within Prematuritas
45,1%
54,9%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
74,2%
90,3%
82,3%
% of Total
37,1%
45,2%
82,3%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Count Expected Count
Total
Total
8
Expected Count
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Prematuritas % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
2,763a
1
,096
Continuity Correctionb
1,768
1
,184
Likelihood Ratio
2,849
1
,091
Pearson Chi-Square
Fisher's Exact Test Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
,182 2,718
1
,099
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
,091
90
Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Prematuritas (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.2.3
Lower
Upper
3,246
,771
13,661
1,613
1,006
2,585
,497
,183
1,346
62
Asfiksia neonatorum Asfiksia neonatorum * Diagnosis Crosstabulation Diagnosis SNHL
Asfiksia neonatorum
Ya
Count
5
10
5,0
5,0
10,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
16,1%
16,1%
16,1%
8,1%
8,1%
16,1%
26
26
52
26,0
26,0
52,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
83,9%
83,9%
83,9%
% of Total
41,9%
41,9%
83,9%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Asfiksia neonatorum % within Diagnosis % of Total Count Expected Count % within Asfiksia neonatorum
Total
Total
5
Expected Count
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Asfiksia neonatorum % within Diagnosis % of Total
91
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
df
,000a
1
1,000
Continuity Correctionb
,000
1
1,000
Likelihood Ratio
,000
1
1,000
Pearson Chi-Square
Fisher's Exact Test
1,000
Linear-by-Linear Association
,000
N of Valid Cases
1
,634
1,000
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5,00. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Asfiksia neonatorum (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.2.4
Lower
Upper
1,000
,258
3,871
1,000
,508
1,968
1,000
,508
1,968
62
Ikterus neonatorum Crosstab Diagnosis SNHL
Ikterus neonatorum
Ya
Count
Tidak SNHL
Total
4
6
10
5,0
5,0
10,0
% within Ikterus neonatorum
40,0%
60,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
12,9%
19,4%
16,1%
6,5%
9,7%
16,1%
Expected Count
% of Total
92
Tidak
Count
27
25
52
26,0
26,0
52,0
% within Ikterus neonatorum
51,9%
48,1%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
87,1%
80,6%
83,9%
% of Total
43,5%
40,3%
83,9%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Expected Count
Total
Count Expected Count % within Ikterus neonatorum % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity
Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
,477a
1
,490
,119
1
,730
,480
1
,489
Fisher's Exact Test
,731
Linear-by-Linear Association
,469
N of Valid Cases
1
,493
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5,00. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Ikterus neonatorum (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
Lower
Upper
,617
,156
2,447
,770
,345
1,719
1,248
,699
2,228
62
,366
93
2.3 2.3.1
Faktor postnatal Infeksi postnatal Crosstab Diagnosis SNHL
Infeksi postnatal
Ya
Count
10
13
6,5
6,5
13,0
23,1%
76,9%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
9,7%
32,3%
21,0%
% of Total
4,8%
16,1%
21,0%
28
21
49
24,5
24,5
49,0
% within Infeksi postnatal
57,1%
42,9%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
90,3%
67,7%
79,0%
% of Total
45,2%
33,9%
79,0%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Infeksi postnatal
Count Expected Count
Total
Total
3
Expected Count
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Infeksi postnatal % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
4,769a
1
,029
Continuity Correctionb
3,504
1
,061
Likelihood Ratio
4,980
1
,026
Pearson Chi-Square
Fisher's Exact Test Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
,059 4,692
1
,030
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table
,029
94
Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Infeksi postnatal (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.3.2
Lower
Upper
,225
,055
,920
,404
,145
1,122
1,795
1,157
2,786
62
Penggunaan ventilator mekanis Crosstab Diagnosis SNHL
Penggunaan ventilator
Ya
mekanis
Count
3
4
2,0
2,0
4,0
25,0%
75,0%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
3,2%
9,7%
6,5%
% of Total
1,6%
4,8%
6,5%
30
28
58
29,0
29,0
58,0
51,7%
48,3%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
96,8%
90,3%
93,5%
% of Total
48,4%
45,2%
93,5%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
% within Penggunaan ventilator mekanis
Count Expected Count % within Penggunaan ventilator mekanis
Total
Total
1
Expected Count
Tidak
Tidak SNHL
Count Expected Count % within Penggunaan ventilator mekanis % within Diagnosis % of Total
95
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity Correctionb Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
1,069a
1
,301
,267
1
,605
1,115
1
,291
Fisher's Exact Test
,612
Linear-by-Linear Association
1,052
N of Valid Cases
1
,306
,305
62
a. 2 cells (50,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2,00. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value
Lower
Upper
Odds Ratio for Penggunaan ventilator mekanis (Ya /
,311
,031
3,169
,483
,087
2,687
1,554
,831
2,904
Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
2.3.3
62
Trauma kepala
Crosstab Diagnosis SNHL Trauma kepala
Ya
Count
Tidak SNHL
Total
8
5
13
6,5
6,5
13,0
% within Trauma kepala
61,5%
38,5%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
25,8%
16,1%
21,0%
% of Total
12,9%
8,1%
21,0%
Expected Count
96
Tidak
Count
23
26
49
24,5
24,5
49,0
% within Trauma kepala
46,9%
53,1%
100,0%
% within Diagnosis
74,2%
83,9%
79,0%
% of Total
37,1%
41,9%
79,0%
31
31
62
31,0
31,0
62,0
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
100,0%
50,0%
50,0%
100,0%
Expected Count
Total
Count Expected Count % within Trauma kepala % within Diagnosis % of Total
Chi-Square Tests Asymptotic
Value Pearson Chi-Square Continuity
Correctionb
Likelihood Ratio
df
Significance (2-
Exact Sig. (2-
Exact Sig. (1-
sided)
sided)
sided)
,876a
1
,349
,389
1
,533
,882
1
,348
Fisher's Exact Test
,534
Linear-by-Linear Association
,862
N of Valid Cases
1
,353
62
a. 0 cells (0,0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6,50. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table Risk Estimate 95% Confidence Interval Value Odds Ratio for Trauma kepala (Ya / Tidak) For cohort Diagnosis = SNHL For cohort Diagnosis = Tidak SNHL N of Valid Cases
Lower
Upper
1,809
,518
6,315
1,311
,777
2,211
,725
,347
1,514
62
,267
97
3. Analisis multivariat Case Processing Summary Unweighted Casesa Selected Cases
N
Percent
Included in Analysis
62
100,0
0
,0
62
100,0
0
,0
62
100,0
Missing Cases Total Unselected Cases Total
a. If weight is in effect, see classification table for the total number of cases. Dependent Variable Encoding Original Value
Internal Value
SNHL
0
Tidak SNHL
1
Categorical Variables Codings Parameter coding Frequency Infeksi Postnatal
Prematuritas
BBLR
(1)
Tidak
49
1,000
Ya
13
,000
Tidak
51
1,000
Ya
11
,000
Tidak
51
1,000
Ya
11
,000
Classification Tablea,b Observed
Predicted Diagnosis SNHL
Step 0
Diagnosis
Tidak SNHL
Correct
SNHL
0
31
,0
Tidak SNHL
0
31
100,0
Overall Percentage a. Constant is included in the model. b. The cut value is ,500
Percentage
50,0
98
Variables in the Equation B Step 0
Constant
S.E. ,000
Wald
,254
df
,000
Sig. 1
Exp(B)
1,000
Variables not in the Equation Score Step 0
Variables
df
Sig.
BBLR_reg(1)
8,952
1
,003
Prematur_reg(1)
2,763
1
,096
Postnatal_reg(1)
4,769
1
,029
14,958
3
,002
Overall Statistics
Method: Enter Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients Chi-square Step 1
df
Sig.
Step
18,477
3
,000
Block
18,477
3
,000
Model
18,477
3
,000
Model Summary
Step 1
Cox & Snell R
Nagelkerke R
Square
Square
-2 Log likelihood 67,473a
,258
,344
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001. Classification Tablea Predicted Diagnosis Observed Step 1
Diagnosis
SNHL Tidak SNHL
Overall Percentage a. The cut value is ,500
SNHL
Percentage
Tidak SNHL
Correct
13
18
41,9
2
29
93,5 67,7
1,000
99
Variables in the Equation 95% C.I.for EXP(B) B Step 1a
BBLR_reg(1)
S.E.
Wald
df
Sig.
Exp(B)
Lower
Upper
3,324
1,410
5,553
1
,018
27,759
1,749
440,491
Prematur_reg(1)
,500
,935
,286
1
,593
1,648
,264
10,294
Postnatal_reg(1)
-2,487
1,107
5,042
1
,025
,083
,009
,729
Constant
-1,263
1,235
1,046
1
,306
,283
a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: BBLR_reg, Prematur_reg, Postnatal_reg.
Method: Backward Stepwise (Likelihood Ratio) Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients Chi-square Step 1
Step 2a
df
Sig.
Step
18,477
3
,000
Block
18,477
3
,000
Model
18,477
3
,000
-,288
1
,591
Block
18,189
2
,000
Model
18,189
2
,000
Step
a. A negative Chi-squares value indicates that the Chisquares value has decreased from the previous step. Model Summary
Step
Cox & Snell R
Nagelkerke R
Square
Square
-2 Log likelihood
1
67,473a
,258
,344
2
67,762a
,254
,339
a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 6 because parameter estimates changed by less than ,001.
Classification Tablea Observed
Predicted Diagnosis SNHL
Step 1
Diagnosis
SNHL Tidak SNHL
Percentage
Tidak SNHL
Correct
13
18
41,9
2
29
93,5
100
Overall Percentage Step 2
Diagnosis
67,7
SNHL Tidak SNHL
10
21
32,3
1
30
96,8
Overall Percentage
64,5
a. The cut value is ,500 Variables in the Equation B Step
Step
1a
2a
BBLR_reg(1)
S.E.
Wald
df
Sig.
3,324
1,410
5,553
1
,018
27,759
Prematur_reg(1)
,500
,935
,286
1
,593
1,648
Postnatal_reg(1)
-2,487
1,107
5,042
1
,025
,083
Constant
-1,263
1,235
1,046
1
,306
,283
3,547
1,366
6,738
1
,009
34,703
Postnatal_reg(1)
-2,457
1,101
4,984
1
,026
,086
Constant
-1,063
1,163
,836
1
,361
,345
BBLR_reg(1)
a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: BBLR_reg, Prematur_reg, Postnatal_reg. Model if Term Removed
Variable Step 1
Step 2
Model Log
Change in -2
Likelihood
Log Likelihood
Sig. of the df
Change
BBLR_reg
-38,559
9,645
1
,002
Prematur_reg
-33,881
,288
1
,591
Postnatal_reg
-37,814
8,155
1
,004
BBLR_reg
-40,485
13,209
1
,000
Postnatal_reg
-37,903
8,045
1
,005
Variables not in the Equation Score Step 2a
Exp(B)
Variables
Prematur_reg(1)
Overall Statistics a. Variable(s) removed on step 2: Prematur_reg.
df
Sig.
,290
1
,591
,290
1
,591
101
Lampiran 6. Lembar Pengisian Data Penelitian
Lembar Pengisian Data Penelitian Tanggal: Nomor CM
:
Nama anak
:
Tanggal lahir anak
:
Usia anak (bulan)
:
Nama orang tua/wali
:
Nomor yang bisa dihubungi -
Rumah
:
-
HP
:
Lama menemani anak (jam/hari) : Pekerjaan orang tua/wali
:
Pendidikan orang tua/wali
:
Anak ke
:
Riwayat selama kehamilan -
Rutin cek ke dokter
(ya/tidak)
-
Konsumsi obat/jamu
(ya/tidak)
-
Sakit selama kehamilan
(ya/tidak)
-
Riwayat infeksi selama kehamilan (ya/tidak)
Riwayat kelahiran -
Lahir cukup bulan, > 37 minggu
(ya/tidak)
-
Berat lahir > 2500 gram
(ya/tidak)
-
Lahir normal
(ya/tidak)
-
Perlu alat bantu nafas
(ya/tidak)
-
Menangis saat lahir
(ya/tidak(
-
Riwayat kuning
(ya/tidak)
102
Riwayat anak -
Imunisasi rutin sesuai jadwal
(ya/tidak)
-
Anak sering pilek
(ya/tidak)
-
Riwayat trauma kepala
(ya/tidak)
-
Terdiagnosis Sindrom Down
(ya/tidak)
-
Terdiagnosis retardasi mental
(ya/tidak)
-
Terdiagnosis CAPD
(ya/tidak)
-
Terdiagnosis ADHD
(ya/tidak)
Hasil pemeriksaan BERA -
Telinga kanan
:
-
Telinga kiri
:
-
Kesan
:
103
Lampiran 7. Contoh Hasil Pemeriksaan BERA
104
105
Lampiran 8. Dokumentasi Penelitian
Pemeriksaan BERA
Wawancara setelah pemeriksaan BERA
106
Pengambilan data saat home visit
107
Lampiran 9. Biodata Penulis Biodata Penulis
Identitas Nama
: Debby Fatmala Rahayuningrum
NIM
: 22010112130090
Tempat/tanggal lahir : Magelang/10 Desember 1993 Jenis kelamin
: Perempuan
Alamat
: Kopen RT 1 RW 01 Kaliabu, Salaman, Magelang
Nomor Telepon
:-
Nomor HP
: 085743144695
e-mail
:
[email protected]
Riwayat pendidikan formal 1. SD
: SD Negeri Kaliabu
Lulus tahun: 2006
2. SMP
: SMP Negeri 1 Salaman
Lulus tahun: 2009
3. SMA
: SMA Negeri 1 Magelang
Lulus tahun: 2012
4. FK Undip
: Masuk tahun : 2012
Keanggotaan organisasi 1. Bidang Diklat HIMA KU Undip
Tahun 2012 s/d 2014
2. Departemen KSKI ROHIS KU Undip
Tahun 2012 s/d 2014
3. Divisi Kaderisasi KSM FK Undip
Tahun 2013 s/d 2014
4. Divisi Humas Asy-Syifa Medical Team
Tahun 2015 s/d 2016
5. Divisi Gunung Hutan Maladica KU Undip
Tahun 2015 s/d 2016
6. Divisi Medical Team Diponegoro Volunteer
Tahun 2015 s/d 2016
108
Pengalaman mengikuti lomba karya ilmiah 1. Anggi VS, Syaffa SZ, Debby FR, Ahmad R, Mailia F. Malcivax: Kombinasi Antigen CSp, SEA-1, dan MSP5 dalam Adjuvant AS01 sebagai Strategi Mutakhir Vaksin Multistadium Malaria Tropicana, DIKTI. Prestasi (PKMGT didanai DIKTI). 2. Dea B, Debby FR, Amita M. Permen Madu Berbahan Ekstrak Kulit Buah Sawo Manilkara Zapota: Inovasi Pencegah Oksidasi LDL pada Aterosklerosis sebagai Upaya Preventif Penyakit Jantung Koroner, Scientific Fair FK Undip 2014. Prestasi (Belum ada).
